Atkinson - The Responsible Anarchist

8/6/2019 Atkinson - The Responsible Anarchist

1/16

The Responsible Anarchist: Postmodernism and Social ChangeAuthor(s): Elizabeth AtkinsonSource: British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Mar., 2002), pp. 73-87Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1393098

Accessed: 07/12/2010 07:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toBritish Journal

of Sociology of Education.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1393098?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1393098?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis


2/16

British ournalof SociologyfEducation,Vol.23, No. 1, 2002 Q CarfaxPublishingTaylor Francis roup

TheResponsiblenarchist:postmodernismnd socialchange

ELIZABETHATKINSON, Sunderlandniversitychool f Education, K

ABSTRACT In recentears, theadoption f postmodernheoreticalerspectivesithineducationalresearchaspromptedtrong ritical eaction. orsomecritics particularlyarxist esearchers),hegreatestault ofpostmodernisms that t lacksanagendaor social hange. hispaper akesssuewiththisargument,ndwithourassociatedrguments:1) thatpostmodernismisempowershose o whomit claims ogivevoice;2) that t appeals nly o intellectualsndhas nopracticalalue;3) that tdenies hepossibilityf theconstructionfa newsocialorder;nd(4) that t colludes ith the tatusquo n itsrefusaloact.Addressingachof theseointsn turn,heauthoruggestshat, ontraryo theviewof these ritics, ostmodernismffers powerfulorce or socialchange,hroughheacceptancefuncertainty,heacknowledgementfdiversitynd therefusalo seeconceptsuchas justice' r 'society'asfixed,or as governedyunassailabletruths'.

Introduction: Postmodernists as Irresponsible Nihilists or ResponsibleAnarchists?In our view, 'postmodernism's a theoreticalvirus which paralysesprogressivethought, politics and practice ... postmoderneducationaltheory in fact hasreactionarypolitical consequences.(Cole et al., 1997, pp. 187-188)SurelyI knowwho I am or I can't ask the question'who am I?'. ('Reader', nStronach & MacLure, 1997, p. 164)

In recent years, educationalwriting,particularly n qualitativestudies and philosophyand sociology of education, has seen heated debate over the value of postmodernthinkingto educationalresearch,policy and practice.While postmodernthinkershavegiven increasing attention to education (see, for example, Cherryholmes, 1988; Ball,1990a,b; Lather, 1991; Usher & Edwards, 1994; Blake, 1996, 1997; Stronach &MacLure, 1997; Atkinson,2000a,b), their critics have not been hesitantin mountingavociferous and heartfeltattack on postmodernismas a whole, and postmodernism neducationin particular see,for example, Skeggs, 1991;Cole & Hill, 1995;Hammersley,1996; Cole etal., 1997;Hill etal., 1999;Kelly etal., 1999;Bailey, 1999).This dichotomyis well illustratedn the uncertainstatuspostmodernismholdsin mainstreameducationalresearch.On the one hand,Mortimore(2000)offers Stronach &MacLure's 1997, p. 98)ISSN 0142-5692 (print)/ISSN 1465-3346(online)/02/010073-15 @ 2002 Taylor& Francis LtdDOI: 10.1080/01425690120102863


3/16

74 E. Atkinson

concept of the postmodernist as a 'responsible anarchist', 'standing against the fantasiesof grand narratives, recoverable pasts, and predictable futures' as an example forresearchers to follow, or at least to heed. On the other hand, postmodernism's criticshave continued to deride this whole field of thinking as irresponsible nihilism whoseprotagonists, in Soper's (1991) terms 'refuse to do anything but play'. This has led, notsurprisingly, to a high degree of frustration among the critics of postmodernism, who findit hard to engage in meaningful argument with opponents who will not meet them ontheir own or any other ground.The term 'postmodernism' itself, of course, is open to numerous interpretations, whichsometimes makes it difficult to enter the debate over its usefulness. The term has sucha multiplicity of referents, and its proponents have such a resistance to definitions, thatit can feel almost impossible to pin it down at all. Blake (1996) and MacLure (1995) offervaluable syntheses of the ideas that postmodernism is frequently taken to encompass,while I have attempted to outline some of the characteristics of postmodern thinking(Atkinson, 2000a, pp. 6-7) while acknowledging the limitations of any attempt at definingsuch a diverse and ephemeral collection of ideas. I have summarised these characteristicsas follows:"*resistance towards certainty and resolution;"*rejection of fixed notions of reality, knowledge, or method;"*acceptance of complexity, of lack of clarity and of multiplicity;"*acknowledgement of subjectivity, contradiction and irony;"* rreverence for traditions of philosophy or morality;"*deliberate intent to unsettle assumptions and presuppositions;"*refusal to accept boundaries or hierarchies in ways of thinking; and"*disruption of binaries that define things as either/or.Notwithstanding my allegiance to postmodern irony and playfulness (see McWilliam,1999), my aim in this paper is to engage directly with those criticisms of postmodernismthat relate particularly to the social and political context of education, and specifically tothe concept (and possibility) of social change.

Postmodernism and Social Justice: an Impossible Combination?Whatever the difficulties, we must find means of justifying some principlesagainst others; otherwise there is little point in continuing with research, orwith anything else. (Hammersley, 1996, p. 402)where most philosophers might use the idea of justice to judge a social order,postmodernism regards that idea as itself the product of the social relations thatit serves to judge; that is, the idea was created at a certain time and place, toserve certain interests, and is dependent on a certain intellectual and socialcontext, etc. This greatly complicates any claims about the justice of socialrelations. (Cahoone, 1996, p. 15)

It has been argued (see, in particular, Hill et al., 1999; Kelly et al., 1999) thatpostmodernism can have no agenda for social justice, as it refuses to commit itself to anyone political standpoint or ideological position. Taking a Marxist stance, Kelly et al.(1999) argue that whereas Marxists give equal value to theory and action in order tochange the world, postmodernism privileges theory over action and achieves nothing.This view is echoed by Hartsock (1990, p. 172), although not from a Marxist perspective:


4/16

Postmodernismnd SocialChange 75the point is to change the world, not simply to redescribe ourselves or toreinterpret the world yet again.

The view that it is essential to choose one theoretical perspective or course of action overanother also pervades Swann's (1999) Popperian view of change and improvement, andthis is the focus of Bailey's (1999) critique of postmodernism in the same volume. Froma postmodern perspective, however, such a choice is neither necessary nor automaticallydesirable. McWilliam (1999), drawing on the work of Rorty, refuses to countenance 'textsthat redeem', while Flax sees the recognition of the implicated nature of knowledge as'the end of innocence':Postmodernism calls into question the belief (or hope) that there is some formof innocent knowledge to be had ... By innocent knowledge I mean thediscovery of some sort of truth which can tell us how to act in the world inways that benefit or are for the (at least ultimate) good of all. (1992, p. 447)

This view suggests that social justice agendas that do not deconstruct their ownunderlying assumptions and beliefs may succeed in deluding their protagonists into afalse sense of virtue: postmodern theorists therefore invite us to consider concepts suchas 'justice' as 'effects of power' (see, for example, Popkewitz & Lindblad, 2000). Theimplications of a viewpoint such as this for the prospect of social change are considerable,but they do not rule out the possibility of social change altogether. Far from invalidatingeither the context in which the concept of 'justice' is embedded or the dialogue regardingits meaning, postmodern thinking prevents us from taking the signifier 'justice' forgranted. While postmodernism does not have, and could not have, a 'single' project forsocial justice, it does not deny the possibility of multiple projects, but challenges theautomatic acceptance of the beliefs on which they might be founded. This is not unique,of course, to postmodernism: feminists and Marxists, for example, have questioneddominant moralities and normative social systems in similar ways, although not necess-arily for the same reasons. (See Atkinson (2000b) for a discussion of the articulationbetween postmodernism and these and other critical social theories.)

Through this critical challenge, postmodernism presents itself as an 'inevitable' agentfor change: it challenges the educator, the researcher, the social activist or the politiciannot only to deconstruct the certainties around what they might see as standing in needof change, but also to deconstruct their own certainties as to why they hold this view.The fact that this mode of thinking might change the activist as much as the society inwhich she/he moves links postmodernism with the politics of identity, which for manypostmodern thinkers, particularly feminist poststructuralists, is a central focus of inquiry.What postmodernism offers, however, is a recognition of identity that celebratesmultiplicity and diversity: this is an 'inclusive' rather than an 'exclusive' identity, one thatdraws its strength from disparate sources rather than from what is sometimes experiencedin the discourses of empowerment as a stifling and constraining unity. (For a thoroughexploration of these issues in relation to feminism and postmodernism see, for example,Nicholson (1990) and Butler & Scott (1992).)Postmodernism is not 'safe'-it does not offer to achieve a specific aim-but it isperhaps more honest about its own uncertainty than more secure ideological positionsmight be. How, then, can the uncertainty and insecurity of postmodernism counter thecriticisms levelled against it in relation to social change: (1) that postmodernismdisempowers those to whom it claims to give voice; (2) that it appeals only to intellectualsand has no practical value; (3) that it denies the possibility of the construction of a newsocial order; and (4) that it colludes with the statusquoin its refusal to act? Is it possible,


5/16

76 E. Atkinsonas Elliott (2000, p. 336) puts it, to develop 'a social theory of contemporary post-modernism as a basis for conceptualising justice in terms of difference, diversity,otherness and heterogeneity'? I wish to argue in this paper that it is.

PostmodernismisempowersThoseto Whom t Claims to Give VoiceMost of our institutions have barely begun to absorb the message of modernistsocial criticism; surely, it is too soon to let them off the hook via postmodernheterogeneity and instability. (Bordo, 1990, p. 153)

Many of those who argue for social justice (see, for example, Siraj-Blatchford &Siraj-Blatchford, 1997) see postmodern arguments as 'ultimately denying meaning',seeking instead to reinforce the sense of identity among minority groups. Kelly (1999)also argues for unifying group identities, particularly in the context of the class struggleand its interrelation with the oppression of women. She argues for Marxist feminism inpreference to postmodernism:

Without the use of a theory that can link together the different aspects of thelives of women, analyse and develop strategies to overcome elements of ouroppression, we will remain commentators on the sidelines. Careers can be builtfrom these commentaries, but progressive change will not happen. If feminismhas at its core the understanding of the need for such change, then post-modernist theory has to be rejected in favour of more useful theory. (Kelly,1999, p. 164)Hartsock (1990) critiques Foucault's concept of power, suggesting that it does nothing to

improve the lot of women. McLaren, too, suggests (after turning away from earlierpostmodern views: see, for example, McLaren & Hammer, 1989; McLaren, 1994) thatpostmodernism does not serve the disempowered, but 'frequently collapses into a formof toothless liberalism and airbrushed insurgency' (McLaren & Farahmandpur, 2000,p. 26). Kelly et al. (1999) criticise the value placed on uncertainty in relation to groupidentity, focusing in particular on the work of Lather (1991, 1998). In their view, sucha refusal of identity:

leads to a disabling paralysis as to the way forward. Difference between thesexes is extended to differences between women themselves, 'races', sexualitiesand so on, until it becomes impossible to talk of any group in society at all. Notonly 'class' as a category, but the differently oppressed groups, too, disappear,to be replaced by a celebration of uncertainty, confusion and lack of knowl-edge. (Kelly et al., 1999, p. 4)

Harkin (1998) suggests that it is the instability of language proposed by postmodernismthat robs it of its power for change:language use ought fundamentally to be about cooperation rather thanantagonism, solidarity, not difference. This is not to deny difference, or to buryit in a spurious unity, but to recognise that there is more that unites humanbeings than divides us. It is this central feature of educational endeavour thatshould be protected from the radical relativism of postmodern claims. (p. 438)

To postmodern theorists, however, it is the very instability of language and identity thatboth creates social critique and forces social change. Exploring the grounds on whichwhat is 'comprehensible, true, right and sincere' (as Harkin characterises Habermasiancommunication) are founded yields evidence of the discourses that shape society; and a


6/16

Postmodernismnd Social Change 77consideration of other possible grounds for these concepts, or alternative concepts, canlead to a reconceptualisation of social principles. Similarly, the possibility of rethinkinglanguage disrupts the certainties on which dominant social policy is founded, andtherefore allows for the possibility of rethinking society. Postmodern deconstruction is notthe same as destruction. As Butler (1992, p. 15) puts it:

To deconstruct is not to negate or to dismiss, but to call into question and,perhaps most importantly, to open up a term ... to a reusage or redeploymentthat previously has not been authorized.

The concept of the social construction of identity (hardly new to sociology andphilosophy) has resulted in a reconceptualisation of society. This is not a postmodernargument, but it is one which postmodernism takes up and reinforces. What the criticsare objecting to, perhaps, is not so much the argument as the terms in which it iscouched. However, there is much to be learnt from the complexity of difficult ideas, andpostmodernism is not the first philosophical position (if it can be described as such) toexpress itself in complex language. St. Pierre states (2000, p. 478):

'Clarity' is always a distinction made through positions of power both tosanction what is legitimate (Popkewitz, 1997, p. 18) and to keep the unfamiliarat a distance and illegitimate.This does lay postmodernism open, however, to the second criticism discussed in thispaper: that postmodern thinking is the plaything of intellectuals (see later).

Bailey (1999) has his own objections to the postmodern treatment of the plight of thedisempowered. First, he quotes Tarnas' (1991, p. 400) postmodern reading of Westernhistory (in Bailey, 1999, p. 33):

Under the cloak of Western values, too many sins have been committed.Disenchanted eyes are now cast onto the West's long history of ruthlessexpansionism and exploitation-the rapacity of its elites ... its systematicthriving at the expense of others, its colonialism and imperialism, its slaveryand genocide, its anti-Semitism, its oppression of women, people of color,minorities, homosexuals, the working classes, the poor, its destruction ofindigenous societies throughout the world, its arrogant insensitivity to othercultural traditions and values, its cruel abuse of other forms of life, its blindravaging of virtually the entire planet.

Bailey then goes on to express astonishment that this catalogue of crimes should be laidat the feet of the Western world, particularly as it is represented by the 'vast majority ofEnlightenment thinkers', among whom, presumably, he numbers himself (p. 33):

The postmodern critique of Western culture presents a startling image. It maycome as something of a shock to some readers to discover that they are victims,and in some cases perpetrators, of such crimes against humanity. Despite hisenlistment of almost every marginalised group within society, Tarnas' indict-ment of Western imperialism and oppression is not persuasive, and is entirelyat odds with the values endorsed by the vast majority of Enlightenmentthinkers.

The reader of this statement might be tempted to ask to what or whom Bailey attributeshis wealth, his privilege and his world view, if not to Western imperialism. One mightalso be tempted to wonder where Bailey has been for the past 20 years, when Marxism,feminism, critical theory, cultural studies, development studies, postcolonial studies,critical race theory and queer theory (among others) have taken the West to task for just


7/16

78 E. Atkinsonthose crimes that Tarnas lists. Perhaps the particular strength of postmodernism is thatit does 'come as something of a shock': it may take a considerable intellectual jolt todetach 'Enlightenment thinkers' from the certainty of their own innocence, and it is joltsof this sort (for example, in the 1970s feminist deconstruction of male-dominatedlanguage) that bring about the sort of social change that socialist critics of postmodernismsee as impossible.Elliott is under no illusion regarding criticisms of postmodernism, but does not denythe possibility of an ethical postmodern social theory:

the ethical virtue of postmodernism is that, although many believe it has cutthe epistemological ground from under itself, its primary focus is the Other--that is listening, interpreting and translating the differences and heterogeneityof social differences and cultural exclusions. (2000, p. 338)Bailey sees the postmodern relationship to 'truth' as profoundly problematic for thedisempowered, and quotes Ryan in support of his argument:

It is ... pretty suicidal for embattled minorities to embrace Michel Foucault, letalone Jacques Derrida. The minority view was always that power could beundermined by truth ... Once you read Foucault as saying that truth is simplyan effect of power, you've had it. (Ryan, 1992, p. 21; in Bailey, 1999, p. 36)As Flax (1992) points out, however, 'truth' alone has never been a valid basis for action;or at least, it has underpinned as many social injustices as it has brought about beneficialreform. For postmodernists, as Ryan points out, 'truth' is an effect of power, as describedby Foucault (in Cahoone, 1996, p. 380):

'Truth' is linked in a circular relation with systems of power which produceand sustain it, and to effects of power which it induces and which extend it. Aregime of truth.

Such a view of 'truth' might prompt postmodern researchers to investigate the normativeconstruction of two disempowered groups in education: those identified by the terms'teacher' and 'pupil'. In his discussions of power/knowledge and 'governmentality', thedistribution of the power of the state through seemingly benign and neutral socialinstitutions, Foucault (1991) focuses on the construction of compliant individuals whocarry out state intentions to 'tame' the population (see Popkewitz, 2000) through aprocess of induced self-regulation. This combination of institutional and self-regulation isexemplified par excellencen the school, as described by Ball (1990a, p. 4):

In the process of schooling the student is compiled and constructed both in thepassive processes of objectification, and in an active, self-forming sub-jectification, the latter involving processes of self-understanding mediated by anexternal authority figure-for our purposes, most commonly the teacher.

In the current context of educational reform and central policy initiatives, this mediationcan be seen to be extended further, from the teacher to the state, so that through theapparent agency of the teacher the state can be seen to exercise discipline and controlover the finest details of the pupil's learning. A postmodern reading of these 'benign'initiatives serves 'to render the familiarity of mass education strange' (Ball, 1990a, p. 5)and thus to reveal its subtexts and textual silences. This is not just a way of thinking, itis a medium for critical engagement with educational and social policy agendas. This isevidenced by examples such as Popkewitz' critique (2000; see earlier) of the constructionof national educational policy and evaluation, Pillow's (1997) feminist postmodern


8/16

Postmodernismnd SocialChange 79

approach to policy analysis, or Stronach's (1999) analysis of 'educational effectiveness' ascultural performance (see also Atkinson, 2000b,c, 2000e).

PostmodernismppealsOnlyto Intellectuals nd has no PracticalValueI suppose that postmodern magicians do claim to take the hat out of the rabbitinstead ... while a Derridean deconstructionist, such as myself, would prefer totake the magician out of the hat-rabbit, without ever quite succeeding orfailing, and then spend several decades in worthwhile study of the verb to'conjure' as a notion related to justice, a bringing-into-being, a calling uponspirits, and indeed as a 'spelling'. It's a hard life. ('Text' speaking to 'Footnote',in Stronach & MacLure, 1997, p. 158)

McLaren & Farahmandpur (2000, p. 28) describe the fashion for postmodern analysis as'theoretical-chic', a view that mirrors the sudden rise in postmodernism's popularity andits recent (and rather belated) arrival on the educational scene. To Harkin (1998),postmodern language-play leads to endemic pessimism, particularly in the work ofLyotard (1984):

The relativism that this view of language gives rise to leads ... ultimately to asolipsistic and angst-filled loneliness in which each individual is trapped behindtheir frontal lobes, caught up in texts that constitute their world. (Harkin, 1998,p. 432)

Bordo (1990, p. 144) also complains about the language games postmodernists play:Deconstructionist readings that enact this protean fantasy are continually'slip-slidin' away'; through paradox, inversion, self-subversion, facile and intri-cate textual dance, they often present themselves (maddeningly, to one whowants to enter into critical dialogue with them) as having it any way they want.They refuse to assume a shape for which they must take responsibility.

This 'refusal to take responsibility' is the focus of complaints about postmodern thinkingfrom many sources. However, the playfulness of which the critics complain often acts asa vehicle for serious critical discussion. A perfect example of this is the playful exchangebetween 'Text', 'Footnote', 'Reader' and 'Author' in the final chapter of EducationalResearchUndone Stronach of MacLure, (1997), where the authors create a dialogue thatdeftly and ironically explores assumptions about authorship, ownership, reality and truthin writing, while at the same time contesting and critiquing those assumptions in a whollyserious way. The intricate exchange resembles something like a mixed-doubles match ofintellectual tennis. Here, as elsewhere in postmodern writing, playfulness has a veryserious aim in unsettling our comfortable certainties about what is 'true', 'right','appropriate' or 'normal'.

Bailey's (1999) criticism of postmodernism's intellectual play takes issue with Gellner's(1992) discussion of 'hermeneutic truth', perhaps ignoring the complex (and non-postmodern) lineage of the field of hermeneutics (for a comparison between Gadamer'shermeneutics and postmodernist thinking, see Kerdeman (1999)).

Rather than chasing the illusory 'objective truth', we are led to pursue'hermeneutic truth', acknowledging the subjectivity of both the inquirer andthe inquiry itself. (Bailey, 1999, p. 32)While it might be tempting to dismiss the subjectivity of the hermeneutic, inquiry intoself and subjectivity has a venerable history in philosophy, leading both forward and


9/16

80 E. Atkinsonbackward from Descartes. The tendency to reflect on self is strong within theoreticalperspectives characterised as 'modern' rather than 'postmodern', both in a personallyand in a theoretically reflexive sense. The modernist project itself is thoroughly reflexive.As Cahoone puts it (1996, p. 2), 'modernity has been criticizing itself all its life'. Nor isthe relationship between the self and society a new field of exploration: feminism'semphasis on the personal as political relates closely to Foucault's exploration of the bodyas a political theme: one that has been taken up by feminist poststructuralists, amongothers (see, for example, Butler, 1992, 1993; Fine, 1994). Similarly, Gellner's focus onsubjectivity both echoes established thinking and explores issues of real social conse-quence. The question for this paper is how can such a focus affect the world 'out there'and bring about social change. I have already explored, elsewhere, the way in whichideas permeate social action in the context of education, either consciously or uncon-sciously, and how a re-reading of identity can affect the self in society (Atkinson, 2000d,2001). The essence of the argument in the former is that thinking and being, far fromoccupying separate domains, are inextricably related to one another, and that action is(almost) always determined by ideas, whether we are cognisant of them or not. Thus, aconcentration on the subjectivity of inquiry and inquirer takes the researcher not 'further'from the field of action, but 'closer' to it.Postmodernism offers to deconstruct 'the question that shuts down the trouble'(Britzman & Dippo, 2000) in order to create an educational climate of challenge andinquiry rather than one of compliance and regulated autonomy; a climate in which theseeming innocence of words cannot go unquestioned. Rather than seeing postmodernthinking as idle word-play for intellectuals, it might be more useful to view it as a formof theoretical and ideological 'bricolage': a drawing together of intellectual tools for thetask at hand. This is not 'play', but 'work': the work of envisaging 'new imaginaries'(Scheurich, 1996), of 'constructing different knowledge and constructing knowledgedifferently' (St. Pierre, 1997a). The result, as Fraser & Nicholson (1999) put it in relationto a proposed postmodern feminist theory,

would look more like a tapestry composed of threads of many different huesthan one woven in a single color ... (p. 35)Thus the postmodern theorist joins others in shaping society: the researcher and socialtheorist have their part to play in bringing about social change. Goodson (1999) arguesfor the role of the academic as 'public intellectual' rather than servant of the state, whileSmyth & Hattam (2000) see the intellectual as 'hustler, researching against the grain ofthe market'. Ball (1995, p. 268) suggests 'a model of the educational theorist as a culturalcritic offering perspective rather than truth'. The postmodernist as cultural critic, then(see Giroux, 1992; Kincheloe, 1993) has an important role to play in the social andpolitical field, along with others who play similar roles from different philosophical ortheoretical perspectives.

Postmodernismenies thePossibilityof the Constructionof A New Social OrderArticulating one's identity changed from being a path to political action tobeing the political action itself... Although on the surface [postmodern] writersappeared to be extending democracy by giving new groups a voice, what theywere in fact holding out was nothing more than a debased pluralism. (Bourne,1999, pp. 134-137)

This third criticism follows, in essence, form the first two. It posits a philosophical world


10/16

Postmodernismnd Social Change 81in which social action and social change cannot take place; first because the philosophyon which it is based disempowers those who need it most and, second, because itsexponents are too busy playing with ideas to engage in social action anyway. This view,however, seems to confuse 'deconstruction' with 'destruction': to take apart is to revealwhat is hidden, but this does not necessarily mean to destroy, or to retreat into naiverelativism. As Blake puts it:

What the more thoughtful postmodernist does, then, is not for one moment toretreat into relativism ... but to draw attention to the politics of knowledge andreserve scepticism for those views-by no means all views-which claim to riseabove the politics. (1997, p. 300)Postmodern theory explores the relationship between the personal and the political,between discourse and society. The reductionist view of postmodernism, which sees it aslimiting the scope of its inquiry merely to the personal, the contingent, and the local, failsto recognise the postmodern view of the personal as the product of the social, thecontingent as the product of the determined, the local as the product of the global, andviceversa n each case. For example, while the critics complain (for example, Kelly et al.,1999) that the Foucauldian focus on the body and 'the gaze', mediated by discourses ofdiscipline, surveillance, mental health and sexuality, distracts attention from critical socialissues, for Foucault this focus stands at the centre of social critique. It is through thesevery discourses that power is exerted and disseminated (see, for example, Foucault, 1977,1981, 1991).

Following Foucault, McCarthy & Dimitriades (2000) discuss the notion of 'govern-mentality' in relation to the sociology of education, seeing the state as:

a de-centred system of networks-one in which everyday practices in socialinstitutions such as education ... help to broker contemporary change. (p. 172)If contemporary change occurs through the dissemination of power via networks ofcontrol, the opening up of these networks and the examination of their textual silencesis a powerful force for social change. This is allied to the 'strategic postmodernism' ofLemert (1997): 'a discourse which imagines alternative social futures by rethinking andrewriting modernity itself (Elliott, 2000, p. 337).

By examining contemporary forms of control, through which 'discipline blocksrelations of power, in that it objectifies and fixes people under its gaze and does not allowthem to circulate in unpredictable ways' (St. Pierre, 2000, p. 491), postmodern theoristsoffer practitioners different ways of seeing the limits to their freedom in the real world.My own analysis (Atkinson, 2002) of the way in which the implementation and policingof the National Literacy Strategy does not allow teachers to 'circulate in unpredictableways' is an example of such work. In the wider world of social and educational research,the reconceptualisation of research methods from a postmodern perspective (see, forexample, Lather, 1991; Britzman, 1995; Scheurich, 1996, 1997; St. Pierre, 1997a,b;Stronach & MacLure, 1997) brings about real changes in the way in which researchersconduct their work, again with real implications for changing relations of power. Giventhe current focus (especially in the UK) on research informing practice in education, thisis a particularly crucial moment for exploring the potential of postmodern thinking forbringing about change in the actual conduct, and interpretation, of inquiry.

Moreover, the understanding of social contexts and situations as the intersection ofdisparate discourses may have the effect of enabling greater mutual understanding andtolerance, rather than the entrenchment of existing hegemonies. In this way, post-modernism may offer new possibilities for communication and cooperation. Where


11/16

82 E. Atkinson'women', for example, stand at the intersection of race, class and sexual orientation, apostmodern re-reading of 'woman' allows for the incorporation of feminism, post-colonialism, Marxism and queer theory into a radical questioning of the original signifier.Butler summarises this position succinctly:

I would argue that the rifts among women over the content of the term[woman] ought to be safeguarded and prized, indeed, that this constant riftingought to be affirmed as the ungrounded ground of feminist theory. Todeconstruct the subject of feminism is not, then, to censure its usage, but, onthe contrary, to release the term into a future of multiple significations. (1992,p. 16)

Similarly, where the colonised stand at the intersection of race, class, culture and gender,a postmodern perspective allows the contested subject to stand at the interstices, to livelegitimately in liminal spaces (Bhabha, 1994) where liminality is a valid, and recognised,space to occupy. It is this legitimation, this recognition of what Collins (2000) describesas intersectionality, that re-shapes the binary oppositions characterised by notions of'centre' and 'margin', and allows for communication with and between multiple voices.Although Collins is cautious about the overall benefits of postmodernism, she identifiesits value in legitimating 'marginal' subjectivities and ways of knowing.While postmodern thinkers see new possibilities for communication arising from theemergence of disparate voices, however, Harkin (1998) suggests that postmodernism failsto distinguish between coercive and non-coercive communication

Drawing on the work of Habermas, a distinction may be made betweenlanguage used for the imposition of will through power and violence, and thepotential of a common will formed in non-coercive communication. (p. 430)

However, apparently 'non-coercive' communication can operate in subtle ways, boththrough the seductive language of 'what works' and 'best practice' (Atkinson, 2000c) and,even more covertly, through the language of 'common sense'. Apple (1998) andPopkewitz (2000) both see the recruitment of 'common sense' to the support of policy asa way in which 'effects of power' are brought about, with common sense replacingcritical thinking, or 'thinking otherwise' (Ball, 1995). Taking apart the 'common sense'that drives social and educational policy initiatives offers the possibility of social changein different, although not always predictable, directions. St. Pierre (2000, p. 479) assertsthat

poststructural critiques ... can be employed to examine any commonplacesituation, any ordinary event or process, in order to think differently about thatoccurrence-to open up what seems 'natural' to other possibilities.

Postmodernismolludeswith the Status Quoin its Refusalto ActGospelized and accorded a sacerdotal status in the temple of the newpostsocialist Left, postmodern theory has failed to provide an effective counter-strategy to the spread of neoliberal ideology that currently holds educationalpolicy and practice in its thrall. In fact, it has provided neoliberalism with thepolitical stability it needs to reproduce its most troublesome determinations.(McLaren & Farahmandpur, 2000, p. 28)the tools of postmodernism produce only a more volatile version of the radicalright. (Wainwright, 1994, p. 100)


12/16

PostmodernismndSocialChange 83Thisfourth riticism,gain, ollowson from he first hree.A philosophyr worldviewthat denies the identityof those who might stand in need of liberation,which isself-absorbednword-playndwhich s toobusy hinkingndplayingo move ora newsocialorder, s by itsveryinactionguiltyof colludingwith the oppressionf dominantsocial/politicalorces.Habermaselt thisso stronglyhathe described ostmodernistss'the youngconservatives'in Cahoone,1996);a view that is echoedparticularlyypostmodernism's arxist ritics.As I have alreadyargued,however,postmodernismffers a tool with which todeconstructhe dominance o which ts critics laim t is so insensitive.ndeed, t is thedominance f inaction,hesupposed eutralityf the stateanditspolicies,hat s at thecentreof muchpostmodernritique. oucaultuggestshatouraimshouldbe to uncovertheseapparentnstitutionaleutralitiesn order o unmaskthepolitical iolencewhichhasalwaysexercisedtselfobscurelyhroughhem'(inRabinow,1984,p. 6). Farfrombeingmereword-play,he deconstructionf the texts hatclaim o liberate,o educate,to emancipate,ffers powerfulwayforwardn opposinghe statusuo.Thus,McCarthy& Dimitriades2000) nd Sleeter2000)deconstructhelanguage fpoliticaleformhat,whilebenignon the surface suchas the infamousEnglishor All' edict for mono-lingualismn California),ctually onstrains nddisempowershosewhom t claims oserve.My own work n this field(forexample,Atkinson, 000b,c)exploreswhatis notcreatedbythe textsof teaching nd earning,orbothpupilsandteachers,hatthe NewLabour overnmentasrecentlymposed n schools ndtrainingnstitutionsn EnglandandWales. na closer ocusontheNationalLiteracy trategy, hichaims oraiseiteracystandardsorallchildren y age 11,I exploreheparticularkind'of literacy mbeddedin thestrategy'srameworkf ObjectivesDepartmentorEducation ndEmployment,1998)andtheparticularlyEnglish' indof literacyhat his mplies seeAtkinson,002).Together, hesepostmodernritiques fferan alternativenderstandingf whatis tooeasily aken orgrantedby practitionersndpolicy-makerslike.McCarthy& Dimitriades2000)describe uchcentralisedtrategies,aken ogether, s'a complexof technologies f truth'(p. 172),linking hem to Nietzsche'spoliticsofresentment'y which'theother' s excludedanddenied.Thus,a postmodernnalysisof abenign ducationaltrategyevealst as akeyelementna 'cycleof control'McLaren& Baltodano, 000),whichmay denydemocracyhrough he verymeansby which tclaims o create t. As Popkewitz utsit:Power sexercisedess hrough rute orceandmore hroughheways nwhichknowledge therulesof reason) onstructshe 'objects' y whichwe organizeand act on the issues,problems, ndpractices f daily ife.(2000,p. 18)Deconstructionasa potentialordestabilisingndcritiquinghe status uohrough nexamination f this subtleexerciseof power.Stronach nd MacLure ee postmoderndeconstructions in itselfeducative, s well as subversive,ndtherefore s an agentofchange:

deconstruction,t mightbeargued, ught o be a central oncern feducationalresearch ndtheory.Afterall,Derridadefines t as 'a critical ulture,a kindof education'.1997,p. 32)Conclusion: A Good Way to Think But a Bad Way to ListenPerhaps one of the greatest difficulties in engaging in debate over radically opposedtheoretical,philosophicalor sociologicalperspectives s that of avoidingblind assertions


13/16

84 E. Atkinsonthat rest on belief ratherthan criticalthinking.The temptation or each side to selecttheworst faults of its opponentsfor criticism s strong enough to lead the embattled sidesaway from any serious sort of engagementat all, or simplyto dismisseach other as notworth talkingto. As the 'Text' puts it:

That's the problem with writing, very much given to the monologue, tocrescendosof rhetoric,never very far away from the scandal of hypnosis ...it's a good way to think but a bad way to listen. (Stronach& MacLure, 1997,p. 18)

In this paper, I have attempted to facilitatejust such a serious engagement throughofferinga critical discussionof specific aspectsof the anti-postmodern rgument.Ratherthan adding to the sepulchralwarningsof those such as Bailey, who suggeststhat 'bysystematically rainingstudents n the use of emptyjargon and crypticlanguage games,postmodern teachers and theorists threaten the knowledge and understandingof agenerationof students'(1999, p. 37), perhapscriticsmight consider the more measuredview of Cahoone:

Postmodernismdeservescareful,sober scrutiny,devoid of trendyenthusiasm,indignant condemnation, or reactionaryfear. Its appearance is unlikely &either to save the Westernworld or destroyit. (1996, p. 2)

Correspondence:lizabethAtkinson,SunderlandUniversitySchool of Education,Hammer-ton Hall, Gray Road, Sunderland SR2 8JB, UK. E-mail: [email protected] critiqueof this paper by Mike Cole, and the author'sresponse, appearin TheSchool ield,XII(1/2).

REFERENCESAPPLE,M. (1998)Education and the new hegemonicblocs:doing policy the 'right' way, Internationaltudiesn

Sociologyof Education,8(2), pp. 181-202.ATKINSON,E. (2000a)What can postmodern thinkingdo for educational research?Paper presentedat theAnnualMeeting of the AmericanEducationalResearchAssociation,New Orleans, LA, April.ATKINSON,E. (2000b) The promise of uncertainty: ducation,postmodernismand the politics of possibility,

InternationalStudies n Sociologyof Education,10(1), pp. 81-99.ATKINSON, E. (2000c) In defence of ideas, or why 'what works' is not enough, BritishJournal of SociologyofEducation,1(3), pp. 317-330.ATKINSON,E. (2000d)Behind the inquiringmind:exploringthe transitionfrom external to internal inquiry,

ReflectivePractice, 1(2), pp. 149-164.ATKINSON,E. (2000e) The National Literacy Strategy as cultural performance: some reflections on the

meaning(s)of literacy n English primaryclassrooms.Paper presentedat the joint meetingof the EuropeanCouncil for Educational Research and the Scottish Educational Research Association, Edinburgh,September.

ATKINSON, E. (2001) Deconstructing boundaries: out on the inside?, InternationalJournal of QualitativeStudies nEducation,4(3),pp. 307-316.BAILEY,R. (1999) The abdicationof reason:post-modernattacksupon science and rationalism,n:J. SWANN& J. PRATT(Eds) ImprovingEducation:realistapproacheso methodand research(London, Cassell).BALL,S.J. (Ed.) (1990a) Foucaultand Education;disciplinesand knowledgeLondon, Routledge).BALL,SJ. (1990b) Politics and PolicyMaking in Education(London, Routledge).BALL, J. (1995) Intellectualsor technicians?The urgent role of theory in educationalstudies,Britishournal

of EducationalStudies,43(3), pp. 255-271.BHABHA,H.K. (1994) The Locationof Culture(London, Routledge).


14/16

PostmodemrismndSocialChange 85BLAKE, . (1996)Betweenpostmodernismand anti-modernism: he predicamentof educationalstudies,British

Journalof Educationaltudies,4(1), pp. 42-65.BLAKE, . (1997) A postmodernismworth bothering about: a rejoinderto Cole, Hill and Rikowski,BritishJournalof Educationaltudies,5(3), pp. 293-305.BORDO, . (1990) Feminism, postmodernism,and gender-scepticism, n: LJ. NICHOLSON(Ed.) Feminism/PostmodernismLondon,Routledge).

BOURNE,J.1999)Racism,postmodernismand the flightfrom class,in: D. HILL, . MCLAREN,. COLE& G.RIKOWSKIEds)Postmodernismn Educationalheoy:educationndthepolitics fhuman esistanceLondon,TufnellPress).

BRITZMAN,D.P. (1995). 'The question of belief: writing poststructuralethnography,InternationalournalofQualitativetudiesn Education,(3), pp. 229-238.

BRITZMAN,D.P. & DIPPO,D. (2000) On the future of awfulthoughtsin teachereducation,Teaching ducation,11(1),pp. 31-37.BUTLER,. (1992) Contingentfoundations: eminism and the questionof 'postmodernism',n:J. BUTLER J.SCOTTEds)Feminists heorizehePoliticalNew York, Routledge).BUTLER,J.1993) Bodies hatMatterNew York, Routledge).BUTLER,J.& SCOTT,J.W. Eds) (1992) Feminists heorizehePoliticalNew York, Routledge).CAHOONE,E. (Ed.) (1996) FromModernismo Postmodernism:n anthologyOxford, Blackwell).CHERRYHOLMES,. (1988)Power ndCriticism:oststructuralnvestigationsneducationNewYork,Teachers'College

Press).COLE,M. & HILL,D. (1995) Games of despairand rhetorics of resistance:postmodernism,education andreaction,Britishournalof Sociologyf Education,6(2), pp. 165-182.COLE,M., HILL,D. & RIKOWSKI,. (1997) Between postmodernismand nowhere: the predicamentof thepostmodernist,Britishournalof Educationaltudies, 5(2), pp. 187-200.COLLINS,P.H. (2000)What's going on? Blackfeministthoughtand the politicsof postmodernism,n: E.A. ST.PIERRE& W.S. PILLOWEds) WorkingheRuins:eminist oststructuralheoyandmethodsn educationLondon,Routledge).DEPARTMENTOREDUCATIONNDEMPLOYMENT1998) TheNationalLiteracy trategy:rameworkor teaching

(London, DfEE).ELLIOTT,. (2000) The ethical antinomiesof postmodernity review essay), Sociology,4(2), pp. 335-340.FINE,M. (1994) Workingthe hyphens: reinventingself and other in qualitativeresearch, n: N. DENZIN& Y.LINCOLNEds)Handbookf QualitativeesearchThousandOaks, CA, Sage).FLAx, . (1992)The end of innocence,in:J. BUTLER J. SCOTTEds) 1992)Feminists heorizehePolitical(NewYork, Routledge).FOUCAULT,. (1977)DisciplinendPunish: hebirth f theprison New York,Vintage Books).FOUCAULT,. (1981) TheHistory f Sexuality, ol. 1 (London,Allen Lane).FOUCAULT,M. (1991) Governmentality, in: G. BURCHELL, . GORDON& P. MILLER(Eds) The FoucaultEffect:studiesngovemmentalityChicago,IL, Universityof Chicago).FRASER,. & NICHOLSON,J. (1990)Social criticismwithoutphilosophy:an encounterbetween feminismandpostmodernism, n: L.J.NICHOLSONEd.)Feminism/PostmodernismLondon, Routledge).GELLNER,E. (1992) Postmodemrnism,eason ndReligionLondon, Routledge).GIROUX, . (1992)BorderCrossingsLondon,Routledge).GOODSON,. (1999)The educationalresearcheras a publicintellectual,BritishEducationalesearchJournal, 5(3),

pp. 277-298.HARKIN,. (1998) In defence of the modernistproject in education,BritishournalofEducationaltudies,6(4),pp. 428-439.

HAMMERSLEY,M. (1996) Post mortem or post modern? Some reflections on Britishsociologyof education,British ournalof Educationaltudies,4(4), pp. 395-407.HARTSOCK,. (1990) Foucault on power: a theory for women? in: LJ. NICHOLSONEd.) (1990) Feminism/PostmodernismLondon, Routledge).HILL,D., MCLAREN,., COLE,M. & RIKOWSKI,G. (Eds)(1999)Postmodernismn Educationalheog: ducationndthepolitics f human esistanceLondon,Tufnell Press).KELLY,J.1999)Postmodernismand feminism: he road to nowhere,in: D. HILL, . McLAREN,M. COLE& G.RIKOWSKIEds)Postmodernismn Educationalheo-y: educationndthepolitics fhuman esistanceLondon,Tufnell

Press).KELLY,J., COLE,M. & HILL,D. (1999) Resistance postmodernism and the ordeal of the undecidable. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of theBritish EducationalResearchAssociation,Brighton, September 1999.KERDEMAN,D. (1999) Between memory and differance: (radically) understanding the other, Educational

Philosophyand Theory,31(2), pp. 225-229.


15/16

86 E. AtkinsonKINCHELOE,J.L.1993) Toward Critical olitics f Teacherhinking: appinghepostmodernWestport,CT, Berginand Garvey).LATHER,. (1991) Gettingmart:eminist esearchndpedagogy ith/inthepostmodernNew York, Routledge).LATHER,. (1998) Critical pedagogy and its complicities:a praxis of stuck places, EducationalTheory,8(4),pp. 487-497.LEMERT,C. (1997) Postmodernisms Not WhatYouThink Oxford,Blackwell).LYOTARD,J.-F.(1984) in: G. BENNINGTONB. MASSUMITrans)ThePostmodemrnondition:reportnknowledge(Manchester,ManchesterUniversityPress).MACLURE,M. (1995) Postmodernism: postscript,EducationalctionResearch,(1),pp. 105-116.MAcLURE,M. (1996)Tellingtransitions: oundaryworkin narrativesof becoming an actionresearcher,BritishEducational esearchJournal, 2(3), pp. 273-286.MCCARTHY,C. & DIMITRIADES,G. (2000)Govemmentalityand the sociologyof education:media, education

policy and the politics of resentment,Britishournal f Sociologyf Education,1(2),pp. 169-185.MCLAREN,P. (1994) Multiculturalismand the postmodern critique:towards a pedagogy of resistanceand

transformation,n: H. GIROUX& P. MCLAREN(Eds)Between orders:edagogynd thepolitics f culturaltudies(London, Routledge).MCLAREN,. & HAMMER,R. (1989) Criticalpedagogy and the postmodernchallenge: towards a critical

postmodernistpedagogy of liberation,Educationaloundations,(3), pp. 29-62.McLAREN, . & BALTODANO,.P. (2000) The future of teacher education and the politics of resistance,

Teachingducation,1(1),pp. 47-60.MCLAREN,P. & FARAHMANDPUR,. (2000) Reconsidering Marx in post-Marxisttimes: a requiem for

postmodernism?,Educationalesearcher,9(3),pp. 25-33.MCWILLIAM,. (1999) Irony deficiencyand vitamin B. Paper presentedat the AnnualConferencef theAmericanEducationalesearchssociation, ontreal,April.MORTIMORE,P. (1999) Does educational research matter? (PresidentialAddress),BritishEducational esearch

Journal,26(1),pp. 5-24.NICHOLSON,. (Ed.) (1990) Feminism/PostmodernismLondon, Routledge).PILLOW, . (1997)Decentring silences/troubling rony:a feministpostmodernapproachto policy analysis, n:C. MARSHALLEd.)FeministCritical olityAnalysis: aprimaryndsecondarychoolingerspectiveLondon,Falmer

Press).RABINOW,. (Ed.) (1984) TheFoucault eaderNew York, Pantheon).RYAN,A. (1992) Princetondiary, London eview fBooks,14(6),p. 21.POPKEWITZ, .S. (1997) A changing terrain of knowledgeand power: a social epistemologyof educational

research,Educationalesearcher,6(9),pp. 18-29.POPKEWITZ, .S. (2000) The denial of change in educationalchange: systemsof ideas in the constructionofnationalpolicy and evaluation,Educationalesearcher,9(1),pp. 19-29.POPKEWITZ, .S. & LINDBLAD,S. (2000) Educationalgovernanceand social inclusion and exclusion: someconceptualdifficultiesand problematics n policy and research, Discourse,1(1)pp. 5-44.SCHEURICH,J. (1996) The masksof validity:a deconstructive nvestigation,Internationalournalof QualitativeStudiesn Education,(1), pp. 49-60.SCHEURICH,JJ.1997) Research ethodn thePostmodernLondon,FalmerPress).SIRAJ-BLATCHFORD,. & SIRAJ-BLATCHFORD,. (1997) Reflexivity, social justice and educationalresearch,

Cambridgeournalof Education,7(2),pp. 235-248.SKEGGS,B. (1991) Postmodernism:what is all the fuss about?, British ournalof Sociologyf Education, 2,

pp. 255-267.SLEETER,C.E. (2000)Keepingthe lid on:multiculturalurriculum nd the organizationof consciousness.Paper

presentedat the AnnualConferencef theAmerican ducational esearchssociation,ew Orleans, LA, April.SMYTH,J. & HATTAM,. (2000) Intellectual as hustler:researching against the grain of the market,BritishEducational esearchournal,26(2), pp. 157-175.SOPER,K. (1991) Postmodernism, ubjectivityand the questionof value, NewLeftReview,186, pp. 120-128.ST.PIERRE,.A. (1997a) Methodologyin the fold and the irruptionof transgressivedata, Internationalournal

of Qualitativetudiesn Education,0(2),pp. 175-189.ST.PIERRE,.A. (1997b)An introduction o figurations--apoststructuralracticeof inquiry,Internationaloumrnalof Qualitativetudiesn Education,0(3), pp. 279-284.ST. PIERRE,.A. (2000) Poststructuraleminism in education: an overview,Internationalournalof QualitativeStudiesn Education,3(5), pp. 477-515.


16/16

PostmodernismndSocialChange 87STRONACH,. (1999) Shouting theatre in a crowded fire: 'educational effectiveness'as culturalperformance,Evaluation,(2), pp. 173-193.STRONACH,. & MACLURE, . (1997) Educational esearch ndone:hepostmodernmbraceBuckingham,Open

UniversityPress).SWANN,J.1999) Pursuing ruth:a science of education,in:J. SWANN J. PRATT(Eds)Improvingducation:ealist

approacheso method nd researchLondon,Cassell).TARNAS,. (1991) ThePassion f the Western ind.understandinghe deas hathaveshapedurworld iew New York,BallantineBooks).USHER,R. & EDWARDS,. (1994) PostmodernismndEducationLondon, Routledge).WAINWRIGHT,. (1994)Argumentsor a NewLeft:answeringhereemarketrightCambridge,MA, Blackwell).

Atkinson - The Responsible Anarchist

Documents

Transcript of Atkinson - The Responsible Anarchist